THE DRAWING’S MAKER WAS A LITTLE CONFUSED
THIS DRAWING DOES NOT MAKE SENSE!
Did the draftsman intend for this drawing as a joke? Anyone that has even modest skills in reading drawing images will see this one as illogical. It is so bad, its comical! If it WAS intended as a joke, the draftsman did well.
Many people had to have “examined” the drawing before and after release. It was even REVISED once. I’m at a loss for an explanation other than the focus of attention was the table of dimensions and not the image. No one noticed the illogical image (or cared to make changes if they did). Amazing!
Posted on October 31, 2011, in ART AND CRAFTSMANSHIP OF THE DRAFTSMAN, TRIVIA FROM THE UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD DRAWING COLLECTION and tagged ART AND CRAFTSMANSHIP OF THE DRAFTSMAN, TRIVIA FROM THE UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD DRAWING COLLECTION. Bookmark the permalink. 4 Comments.
UNION PACIFIC DRAWING TRIVIA 
Greeat post thankyou
But it’s not a perspective drawing, just two orthographic views. The upper view is the top view, showing a wood beam with an angled cut on each end. The lower view is a view of the wider side, with the extent of the angled cuts shown as hidden lines where the intersect the opposite surface. Since the end cuts are at an angle from two planes, two views are needed to define them. There is no end view, because it would simply be a rectangle show in dimensions “F” and “G”. This must have been a modified pilot beam, ends angled to fit the back side of the plow, or a beam that was attached to the plow and temporarily mounted in front of the pilot beam.
Dennis
Hello Dennis,
Alas! Alas! Woe is me!! It’s back to the drawing for me.
Regards, Mel Johnson
It looks OK to me. The drawing was made with perspective so it looks illogical if you’re thinking that it is a plan or elevation view. There is an angled board (with a dimension “G” marked on it) at the front. That board’s width is “H” and not “K.” “K” refers to the overall width of the beam which is “J” + “H” + “J.” The location of the “K” dimensioning is unfortunate — it would have been more understandable if the dimensioning was located above the drawing instead of below it.